How bad could it be?

[ScholarlyDude]

Everyday you hear it. "Trump said this" or "Hillary's gonna do that". Americans are terrified. They feel like, as the creators of South Park put it, they're picking between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. Most of the people I talk to say that they're just picking the lesser of two evils. In a lot of those cases, they're talking about Hillary over Trump. My dad (who doesn't talk to me if he doesn't have to) even pleaded with me to vote Hillary just so Trump stays out of office.

Personally, I don't really have a dog in the fight. I don't identify with any political party, and don't feel much animosity toward either candidate. Anecdotally, I know they've both done shitty things. It's clear that neither of them are saints. So I'm pretty neutral in the debate, but there's something that I always think when people say they're terrified of Trump. I'm not stressed out about it. He has no experience as a politician, and a lot of republicans in Congress actively denounce him.  How much will Trump actually be able to accomplish if he wins? (As of now it seems like he won't anyway)

Donald Trump is many things. A businessman, reality tv star, and the founder of a "university". Hell, he even owned a football team in the 80's. He came close to adding politician to that list over the years and, as we all know, finally checked that box just recently. So far it's been...interesting. There are two ways I could describe Trump's political prowess. A kind way would be that he's got an unconventional style. A negative (and more realistic) way is to say he doesn't seem to know what the hell he's doing. I think his main problem is that he lacks the ability/desire to be subtle.  A big part of politics is dealing with other people. If he alienates the people he's supposed to work with, he's going to falter. He'll either have to learn how to speak the language or teach his own to everyone else. The former requires him to abandon one of his beliefs. The latter requires others to abandon theirs. Neither of those seems terribly likely.

Back on January 4th, Karen Tumulty and Jenna Johnson reported how Trump's campaign tapped  into many mainstream Americans' frustration with political correctness. (Here's a link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/why-trump-may-be-winning-the-war-on-political-correctness/2016/01/04/098cf832-afda-11e5-b711-1998289ffcea_story.html) He thinks that politicians these days are too politically correct.  When he and others talk about eliminating political correctness, it makes sense to me. The idea being that PCness (Can I coin that? Or is it already taken?) obstructs open discussion because certain topics are off-limits. The problem is when it's put into practice. We've all heard about his comments about Mexicans, his thoughts about women, and that deal with the disabled reporter. In the modern political climate, political correctness is the norm. It's a tactic commonly used by politicians to avoid offending some people. If Donald Trump makes it to Washington, he won't speak the language.

Trump's loose lips are a double edged sword. On one hand, his supporters champion him for speaking his mind. On the other hand, he's making a lot of enemies for the same reason. Not only among the voting population, but among his fellow politicians as well. Karen Yourish, Larry Buchanan, and Alicia Parlapiano from New York Times compiled a list of Republican leaders who don't support Trump. (Here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/08/29/us/politics/at-least-110-republican-leaders-wont-vote-for-donald-trump-heres-when-they-reached-their-breaking-point.html) There are 106 of them. A few notables are Mitt "The Mormon Missile" Romney, Jeb "I'm Not Bitter" Bush, and Mr. Universe himself, Arnold Schwartzenegger. More importantly, nearly half of those republicans are currently serving in congress. 49 votes if I counted correctly. Those 49 are mixed between the House and the Senate. The president needs help from congress to actually get things done. Without congressional support, the president only has so much power. We saw it with Obama. The republican controlled congress actively got in his way when he tried to get things done because they didn't support him or his policies. We could see the same with Trump if he's elected. The GOP holds the majority in the House right now, and David Wasserman at fivethirtyeight.com tells us that odds are it'll stay that way. (And here's the link to that: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-house-majority-is-safe-right/) However, he also predicts that the Democrats will narrow the gap. He gives a range of "5 to 20 seats". So Trump will be down a good chunk of votes, and Democrats will have allies against him. That seems like a potent recipe for deadlock to me.

From my lonely corner of relative impartiality, Trump doesn't seem terribly scary. Yes, he?s said some nasty things, and it's possible that he doesn't know what he's doing. That doesn't mean he's going to ruin the country. I think that if anything it means four years of stagnation. Nothing is fucked here, Dude. Checks and balances are a thing.

[Father Erik]

My biggest thing is these darn protests. Everybody seems to be freaking out about this and that. From a Dudeist perspective, all I seem to see is a bunch of angry people causing lots of unrest. Don't get me wrong, I think women deserve equal rights. But man, they just tend to attack and attack. Where is the kindness? So many of them seem to just take all their frustrations out on men of the opposing political party. Maybe I'm being unrealistic but I wish they could sit down with the people they have their beef with and talk it out. Both sides seem to be so close-minded. And more than anything, they need to take a step back and appreciate all the progress we've made in the past hundred and some years, and maybe look to helping those who are still deprived of basic human rights, across the globe. If all that feminist power could be channeled into fighting for the women of the Middle East, I think that would be a lot more beneficial. It's just my opinion, but I think we all have it good enough here that maybe we could help those who can't help themselves.

[Anchorite83]

The majority of these protests are non-violent, but from what I understand there were and still are a lot of smaller groups with their own agendas. I heard somewhere that the local Socialist party showed up just to raise awareness for their group. I'm more certain it's groups like this causing all the guff.

[Chaplain ChuckO]

Often it seems like the groups protesting don't really have anything that actually fits their agenda.  The group of feminists that marched there were touting all sorts of reasons why they were marching, and all but reproductive rights really had nothing to do with their cause.  It really seems like they are doing it just so they feel like they belong to a group; that they are fighting for something, regardless of what it is. 

It also seems that many people are competing to see who's the most marginalized based on identity politics.... Or as I've heard it called, the Oppression Olympics.  People are trying to feel like a special individual by identifying with a group, which is counter intuitive.  When they realize that identifying with a group doesn't make them special as an individual, they start adding groups they identify as to narrow it down to less people.  I think it's really quite sad to see.

For as the election, it's just like the past one's; the people in charge are going to help themselves and their friends, and end up screwing us little guys in the process.  'Tis the nature of politics. 
Me, I voted for myself (a few of my friends did as well).  I'll likely do the same next year because I'll be casting my vote for someone I can trust.
Vote ChuckO 2020

[BikerDude]

How bad could it be?
It could be permanently bad.
Or stubbornly bad.
The worry is an errosion in freedoms necessary to effect change.
Assaults on freedom of speech or the democratic process.
That and misinformation.
You'd need to be asleep to not notice the movement toward that reality.
And I don't just mean trump.
Although I suspect he'll be uniquely willing to swing for the fences in that endevour.

I find myself laughing at that words of the famous 19th century railroad baron Jay Gould
"I will always be able to hire half of the working class to kill the other half"

[Anchorite83]

Often it seems like the groups protesting don't really have anything that actually fits their agenda.  The group of feminists that marched there were touting all sorts of reasons why they were marching, and all but reproductive rights really had nothing to do with their cause.  It really seems like they are doing it just so they feel like they belong to a group; that they are fighting for something, regardless of what it is. 

It also seems that many people are competing to see who's the most marginalized based on identity politics.... Or as I've heard it called, the Oppression Olympics.  People are trying to feel like a special individual by identifying with a group, which is counter intuitive.  When they realize that identifying with a group doesn't make them special as an individual, they start adding groups they identify as to narrow it down to less people.  I think it's really quite sad to see.

For as the election, it's just like the past one's; the people in charge are going to help themselves and their friends, and end up screwing us little guys in the process.  'Tis the nature of politics. 
Me, I voted for myself (a few of my friends did as well).  I'll likely do the same next year because I'll be casting my vote for someone I can trust.
Vote ChuckO 2020

Yeah I guess that can all be true. But whatever, can't control the weather, can't control people, can't control politics. Whatever happens happens man.

[gomezpeter]

I must sayA round of applause for your forum topic.Thanks Again. Really Cool.